The Himachal Pradesh government has approached the Supreme Court seeking authorization for the appointment of 6 parliamentary secretaries, which was recently declared illegal & unconstitutional by the state High Court.
The court, on November 13, quashed the appointments made by Chief Minister Sukhvinder Singh Sukhu’s government and declared the law that facilitated these appointments void.
In its appeal to the Supreme Court, the state government termed the High Court’s ruling as “bad in law” and requested a stay on its order. The government argued that the decision would result in the disqualification of the 6 parliamentary secretaries, all of whom are also serving as Members of the Legislative Assembly, under Article 192 of the Constitution.
This, the government stated, could lead to political instability without a fair adjudication of the matter.
The High Court had not only quashed the appointments but also directed the immediate withdrawal of all facilities and privileges extended to the six officials.
The Court declared the Himachal Pradesh Parliamentary Secretaries (Appointment, Salaries, Allowances, Powers, Privileges, and Amenities) Act, 2006, as void, stating that the appointments were unconstitutional.
It added that the 6 parliamentary secretaries were “usurpers of public office” and ordered that they cease holding office with immediate effect.
The 6 chief parliamentary secretaries appointed by Sukhu on January 8, 2023, ahead of his cabinet expansion, were: Sanjay Awasthi (Arki), Sunder Singh (Kullu), Ram Kumar (Doon), Mohan Lal Barakta (Rohru), Ashish Butail (Palampur), and Kishori Lal (Baijnath).
The High Court ruled that the law allowing these appointments was beyond the legislative competence of the state legislature, rendering the appointments illegal and unconstitutional from the start.
The ruling also declared that the legal protection granted to the office of chief parliamentary secretary under the Himachal Pradesh Legislative Assembly Members (Removal of Disqualifications) Act, 1971, was unconstitutional and invalid. As a result, the affected individuals were no longer entitled to the privileges of the position.
The BJP, through its leader Sat Pal Singh Satti and 10 other MLAs, had filed petitions demanding the quashing of the Act. They argued that the post of chief parliamentary secretary was not recognized under the Constitution or any Act passed by Parliament.
The petitioners also highlighted that the 91st Constitutional Amendment caps the number of ministers to 15% of the legislative assembly, but with the addition of these 6 posts, the total had risen to 18, exceeding the permissible limit.
This is the second time in the state’s history that such appointments have been quashed. In 2005, the High Court had struck down the appointment of eight chief parliamentary secretaries and four parliamentary secretaries, affecting several prominent leaders.
Following the latest ruling, Chief Minister Sukhu stated that the cabinet would carefully study the judgment and decide on the next steps after consultations.
